The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality met on February 23 to discuss a number of agenda items. An archive video of the hearing can be found here and the agenda can be found here.


This report is intended to give you an overview and highlight of the discussions on the various topics taken up. It is not a verbatim transcript of the discussions but is based upon what was audible or understandable to the observer and the desire to get details out as quickly as possible with few errors or omissions.


Item 1: Consideration of the application by Green Valley Special Utility District for new TPDES Permit No. WQ0015917001, to authorize the discharge of treated domestic wastewater with a daily average flow not to exceed 400,000 gallons per day. The wastewater treatment facility will be located at 4060 Stapper Rd., Saint Hedwig, in Bexar County, Texas 78152. The Commission will also consider requests for hearing or reconsideration, related responses and replies, public comment, and the Executive Director’s Response to Comments. (Kathy Humphreys, Abdur Rahim)


Jon Niermann, Chair of the TCEQ

  • Procedure is to determine whether requestors have met procedural and substantiative requirements to have a hearing
  • Requesters who are affected differently than the public are entitled to a hearing
  • Have received 6 requests; 3 from governmental entities
  • Cibolo Creek Municipal Authority concerned about regionalization and water quality
    • Recommends granting their request due to their proximity to the site
  • City of Saint Hedwig proposed a hearing because the facility is to be built in its ETJ
    • Recommends granting their request due to the city’s saturate interest and their concerns about water quality
  • City of Schertz argues Green Valley Service Area overlaps city’s corporate limits and CCN
    • This argument falls short because CCN’s are regulated by the PUC and is not under the limits of this wastewater law
  • City of Schertz also argues Green Valley’s affluent would share same discharge route as the wastewater treatment facility Schertz co-owns with CCMA; they believe it could affect future permitting actions
    • Refer this request to SOAH for an effectiveness determination
  • Recommend hearings will be granted for:
    • Cibolo Creek Municipal Authority
    • City of Saint Hedwig
    • Two members of the public
  • Recommends the commission does not grant hearing for:
    • One member of the public
    • City of Schertz
  • Lindley – Agrees with Niermann’s suggestions
  • SOAH referral for Schertz on the issues of:
    • Whether the draft permit would be protective of water quality and uses of the receiving water
    • Whether the discharge route has been properly characterized
    • Whether the application is complete and accurate
    • Whether issuance of a draft permit is contrary to the TCEQ’s regionalization policy
    • Whether the draft permit authorizes the discharge of domestic wastewater effluent within the Cibolo Creek regional area
    • Whether the commission should deny or alter the terms and conditions of the draft permit
    • Whether the draft permit complies with applicable requirements
    • Whether the draft permit would be protective of the health of the requestors and their families, livestock, and wildlife in the area
    • Whether the draft permit contains adequate provisions to protect the requesters use and enjoyment of property
  • Janecka – Motion to implement Niermann’s recommendations
  • Motion carries


Item 2: Consideration of the application by Metroplex Gunite, L.P. for the approval of a registration to

use the Air Quality Standard Permit for Concrete Batch Plants, Registration No. 164838, which

would authorize construction of a permanent concrete batch plant. The plant site is located at

873 Wall Street Road, Gunter, Grayson County, Texas. The Commission will also consider

requests for hearing and reconsideration, related responses and replies, public comment, and

the Executive Director’s Response to Comments. (Don Nelon, Contessa Gay)


Jon Niermann, Chair of the TCEQ

  • When analyzing contested cases, determine who gets the hearing and which issues are taken up
  • Only persons residing within 440 yards of the proposed facility are entitled to a hearing
  • Since none of the requestors meet that requirement, should deny all of the requests
  • Commissioners Lindley and Janecka agree
  • Lindley – Motion to deny all hearing requests and to issue Air Quality Standard Permit for Concrete Batch Plants to Registration No. 164838
  • Motion carries


Item 3: Consideration of material changes to contracts for goods and services awarded under Chapter

2155 of the Texas Government Code executed during the previous quarter. (Chris Gobert)


Executive Director’s Staff

  • Presenting changes made to contracts and services from June 1, 2021 to August 31, 2021
  • Changes include extensions of contracts or completion of work for 6 months or more or an increase in consideration of 10% or more
  • OPIC recommends the approval of this item
  • Janecka – Motion to pass the Executive Director’s recommendation of material changes to contracts for goods and services
  • Motion carries


Item 4-14

  • Enforcement Division staff – Total assessed administrative penalties are $156,826 with $29,964 differed $32,057 applied to supplemental environmental projects and $94,805 to the general revenue
  • Enforcement Division staff Requests approval of all items
  • Smith – Acknowledged on Items four and five many have signed in, but none wish to speak


Helen Gilbert, Barton Benson Jones

  • Speaking on item 12; represents the purchaser of the Crest Water System
  • Crest filed application for a sale transfer merger application with the PUC last week; are actively in the process of buying this system
  • Asking the board to remand this case to the Executive Director to modify technical ordering provision 2A
  • Provision imposes a 180-day deadline to bring two new water wells online
  • This is unfeasible and unnecessary; there will be a new owner with a better track record in 180 days
  • These sells are not needed; these homes don’t use as much water as normal family homes do
  • Niermann – How much time would take to be prepared with an application for a variance?
    • Gilbert – An additional 180 days
  • Lindley – Crest had to know what was coming in the agreed order, what is Executive Director’s opinion on this request?
    • ED Staff – This case was settled through SOAH
    • ED Staff – Offered to enter into an agreeable order with both parties; which was denied
    • ED Staff – Rather not remand the item after the long process already taken to reach an agreement
    • ED Staff – If the system was sold the order would not be effective against Crest
  • Niermann – So this order does not bind the purchaser?
    • ED Staff – Correct
  • The agreed extension in the agreed order is still discretionary
  • Would like a little more assurance they would be given additional time
  • Niermann and Lindley – Do not want to make any promises other than we can work with them
  • Janecka – Comfortable deferring the item until next meeting to potentially give them more time
  • OPIC Staff – Would be comfortable if commission adopted the order today
  • Niermann – No promises on how they will view a future application for a variance, but they are happy to discuss it
  • OPIC – Recommends approval
  • Lindley – Moves to adopt items 4-14 as recommended by the executive director
  • Motion carries


Item 15:  Consideration of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Monthly Enforcement

Report, submitted for discussion in accordance with Texas Water Code § 7.003. (Susan M.

Jablonski, P.E., Melissa Cordell)

  • ED staff – Presents monthly enforcement report for fiscal year 2022 through December
    • 399 effective administrative orders issued
    • 54 contained supplemental environmental projects
    • Orders assessed a total of $4,892,360 with a payable amount of $3,029,835
    • $1,125,396 are to be paid to supplemental environmental projects
  • Janecka – Is there a big picture order to explain the number of back log orders?
    • ED Staff – Are working the division to address backlog
  • Niermann – No action is necessary on this item


Item 16: were taken up together: Consideration of the adoption of the Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan State Implementation Plan (SIP) Revision for the Freestone-Anderson and the Titus 2010 Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) Nonattainment Areas. The SIP

revision includes a request that the United States Environmental Protection Agency redesignate

the Freestone-Anderson and Titus nonattainment areas to attainment for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS

and provides 10-year maintenance plans for both areas consistent with federal Clean Air Act

(FCAA), §175A requirements. The SIP revision also addresses the comprehensive emissions

inventory and nonattainment new source review certification statement SIP requirements

provided under Part D of the FCAA. (Alison Stokes, John Minter, Terry Salem) (Project No.


  • ED Staff – Revision to the State Implementation Plan requests the EPA re-designate the Freestone-Anderson and the Titus non-attainment areas to attainment for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS
  • Demonstrates both areas will continue to attain the standard through 2034
  • OPIC – Recommends adoption of the redesignation request
  • Niermann – Agree
  • Janecka – Move adoption of the redesignation plan
  • Motion Carries


Items 17: Will be considered on the March 30 agenda

Committee did not meet in closed session